Volvo automatics (AsianWarner) are bullet proof compared with many. The early 80's Volvos did have minor electrical glitches and did suffer rust. Later Volvos, 90 up, Volvo addressed the rust issues and the minor electricals. Also a 4 speed auto became available that replaced the true overdrive they had featured.

Depending on how much one put their foot into the turbos would determine how long they would go. I drove my 760 turbo wagon to 300K and I had no doubt it would have gone another 100K, however, it was a standard but a 1990 240 I had up until not long ago had 265K and was all original and everthing electrical including A/C, cruise, heated seats, etc, all still worked as new and zero rust. I still kick myself for selling that car, first guy who looked at it bought it. The B230 four cylinder engines are a prooven bullet proof engine. It is the engine that earned Volvo it's reputation for durability but later multi-valved B230 engines, like any multi valve are subject to catistrophic failure should a timing belt break (rare)

The 850 Volvo 5 cylinder is not as reliable, or anywhere close, as reliable as that pre 1993 B230! Higher milage 850 5 cyl engines are also known for leaking lots of oil. If you ever look at one, look at the under carriage, more often than not, you will see the whole undersides coated with motor oil.

The latest of the 700 series 960 Volvos 95-97 end of production run, featured a 6 cylinder multi valve engine that are expensive to repair when compared with the older 4 cylinder B230 engine.

1993 was the end of the 240 production run and may be the best of the best!

I'm also a member on the brickyard KA "VolvoSavvy" Here I'm BB

Historical question here.

When did Volvo stop sharing ZF auto trannies with BMW.????

__________________

That must be historical! I joined the Volvo ranks in an 84 240 turbo wagon and was surprised to see the AsianWarner believeing Volvo had made their own!

Exactly why I'm thinking of a wagon.

I'm actually a coupe kind of guy, very few of my cars have had four doors.


Michael

__________________
Usta haves '69 250/8, '76 280C, 1971 250C 114.023, 1976 450SEL 116.033
Current have, 1983 300SD 126.120

Since I have owned a 1971 250/8 (low line 2.8 mit 2 carbs) and 1974 280C, plus the 1996 Buick Wagon, I have some perspective.

The big wagon DOES NOT get bad fuel economy- is aerodynamic and rated at 27mpg on Highway, and at 73-79mph I get about 23-24mpg. So no current suv or MB wagon will match the mpg of these Buick wagons...I did much comparo before choosing the Buick.

They handle quite well...not like a 124 wagon, which is tiny by comparison, but fairly well due to their wide stance and wheel base which is identical to the new Cadillac CTS.

Fast- they don't just have any Chevy 350 (5.7L) V8, but in fact had the Corvette LT1 block, detuned to 260HP, but with much torque. Drop the hammer and you will be flying and the torque at freeway speeds makes cruising and passing effortless.

Safety- the Buick 1996 wagon has the best crash, injury, and fatality statistics of any vehicle on the Federal gov website. Also, on the tilt table test for stability, against all SUV's the Buick wagon was so much better, it wasn't even close. Also the brake are designed for a very heavy trailered load, the they are very heavy duty.

Seats- look for the seats with memory, as they are good as any current MB seats- power lumber, two position heating, power recliner, and other std power seat stuff- also this is on both driver and pass, except for memory.

One Caveat- WATCH OUT for the dreaded Dexcool coolant in those Buicks- it will turn to mud and clog the heater core (no heat!) if not changed at 5 years. Flush it and change to green coolant ASAP!!!

These wagons run and run---I had an identical model (1993) that I ran to 230K miles, and used 1/2 oil in 5K miles, running Mobil 1 oil and filter. That had lower 185hp engine. I sold that wagon to my niece and it ran like the proverbial sewing machine.

So don't diss the Buick too much...but the 1996 is the best and last year. The 1994-96 all had the LT1 engine.

hey, I had a '64 Falcon wagon when I got married (in '79). Great little car.

__________________
past MB rides:
'68 220D
'68 220D(another one)
'67 230
'84 SD
Current rides:
'06 Lexus RX330
'93 Ford F-250
'96 Corvette
'99 Polaris 700 RMK sled
2011 Polaris Assault
'86 Yamaha TT350(good 'ol thumper)

Put me down for the roadmaster as well. I was in the market for a 560sel and took a roadmaster sedan out for a lark. I bought it. 26mpg and loads of grunt. Not the same quality as a Benz but more than adequate. If you breakdown in the middle of nowhere it can be fixed. The wagon can swallow a 4x8 sheet of plywood with the rear seats folded down. Try that with an SUV or minivan.

Jorg

A buddy of mine has a '71 Caddie hearse. He uses it for his remodeling buisness. Awesome station wagon!

__________________
past MB rides:
'68 220D
'68 220D(another one)
'67 230
'84 SD
Current rides:
'06 Lexus RX330
'93 Ford F-250
'96 Corvette
'99 Polaris 700 RMK sled
2011 Polaris Assault
'86 Yamaha TT350(good 'ol thumper)

I'm not fond of wagons. They take about as much room as an SUV and will not tow as much. Of course, if you are not going to tow then you could go ahead with a wagon. What will a wagon do for you that the regular sedan will not? I mean, yes, it has extra space but will it sit there gathering dust or will you actually use it? Why not wait till she has the baby and then see what you need instead of jumping the gun to Volvo, MB or even an SUV.

__________________
01 Ford Excursion Powerstroke
99 E300 Turbodiesel
91 Vette with 383 motor
05 Polaris Sportsman 800 EFI
06 Polaris Sportsman 500 EFI
03 SeaDoo GTX SC Red
03 SeaDoo GTX SC Yellow
04 Tailgator 21 ft Toy Hauler
11 Harley Davidson 883 SuperLow

Once you go wagon, you never go back...

My wife was intent on having a car to lug around our 2 children and any of the neighbors kids she happened to pick up. We had a 92 and a 96 Roadmaster wagon. They were bulletproof, enormous and not the gas guzzlers you would expect. They were also a lot less to maintain than a mercedes, which I was driving at the time. They do however require an additional person to sit on the hood and direct the driver as they attempt to pull these big boats into port. But a ride like sitting in your living room!

Been pulled over in the Wagon twice, once for headlight, another for a little over limit.

You come off like a nice loveable fuzzball...of course I am middle-aged, which may have something to do with it. But sent on with a warning. On speeding, the officer listened to the v8 rumble at idle and said, "Yeah, we used to have those (Caprices) and they are hard keep running slow".

Dopy GM stopped making them, when they sold all they made and at a decent profit...no incentives like the SUV's. As one dealer said, "some dealers ordered all they could get and sold them all, while some ordered none. GM didn't know what they had." Now, look at the new Dodge magnum wagon, which seems to do well.

Also, the 1996 has fuel injection and starts instantly and runs very smoothly to the red line...nice when pulls like a train when pulling out in front of a semi on an on-ramp.

Take a tape measure and compare the numbers. The new Chrysler Pacifica actually has a smaller opening height at the rear opening than the wagon, while getting poorer fuel economy.

Also, my grandchildren lover to ride looking backward out the rear facing third seat...

If you have a boat, esp. big, you really want a wagon...unless you like the elegance of the poor mpg of an SUV...

It's been done.

Attached Thumbnails

       

Ted, would you need to upgrade your Coast Guard license rating to sit behind the wheel of that barge? Your Caddie license may not be of sufficient displacement.

Does owning a Bimmer mean ya have to start saying stuff like "Bling"?

__________________
past MB rides:
'68 220D
'68 220D(another one)
'67 230
'84 SD
Current rides:
'06 Lexus RX330
'93 Ford F-250
'96 Corvette
'99 Polaris 700 RMK sled
2011 Polaris Assault
'86 Yamaha TT350(good 'ol thumper)